Recruit Rank, quantity is rewarded over quality.

[Billdozer]

Can you post images on here? If not I can post an image to the Discord.

I have 2 solid 3 star players ranked just inside the top 300 for my current recruit class at Charlotte. One was decent at New Jersey Camp and the other was top 25. I skipped the Big Apple Camp to save money. My class is ranked 10th in conference although I think my class should be ranked 4th.

Memphis has a 5 star and a 4 star.
UAB has three 4 stars and two 3 stars. Two of the 4 stars are in the top 50 and the other 4 star is just outside the top 50. They might be scary to play next year.
Wichita State has three 3 stars and two 2 stars.

Everyone else in conference ranked 4-9 has a bunch of 1 and 2 star players.

This might be a small thing and I am really enjoying the game so far. It is just really offensive to see my class devalued when many teams ahead have a bunch of far inferior players who did not even go the Big Apple regional Camp and my recruits had good performances at the National Camp in New Jersey.

[Gary Gorski]

So the team rankings for recruits is done by a scoring system and its done this way because this is how it seems to be done IRL so for instance here it is on rivals.com

https://n.rivals.com/team_rankings/2024 ... basketball

Kennesaw State is ranked 32nd and they have 5 3-star recruits - they're right ahead of St Marys and LSU who each have 2 4-star recruits and Indiana is a couple spots down with 1 5-star. Now would I rather have one 5-star recruit or 5 3-star recruits? Give me the 5 star one all day.

https://247sports.com/Season/2024-Baske ... =Big%20Ten

24/7 also does this and if you look at the Big Ten Indiana is 17th with their single 5-star player behind Northwestern and Minnesota who both have only 2 3-star players.

Again I don't necessarily agree with it but its how its done it seems and I try to replicate how things tend to be done IRL in most cases. I will double check the values for the formulas but yes if you have more quantity you may end up getting ranked higher for that.

[Billdozer]

Okay, thanks. I guess this is a part of the game where it makes sense to use the real life system. However, the real system seems flawed. I can understand why there might not be much difference between a 2 star and a 3 star but there is generally a big talent gap between a 3-4 or a 4-5 star player. I feel like quantity should be a tie-breaker but quality adds significantly more value to a team.

I am not sure how much work it would be for you to create a new system and include that as an option.

[Gary Gorski]

I don't think it's worth an "option" in the game as it impacts nothing whatsoever - its just an opinion expressed in the game according to the in-game scouting service. Tweaking the system and so on - maybe that is worth looking at and I will take a look at the formula being used. Quantity is important though in a class - nobody knows how these kids will develop and turn out including the game itself with its scouting error built in. Your two 3 star players could turn out to be overrated and be really only worthy of 2 stars where as a team with four 2 star players could have one of those four be a 3 star and then you would easily say his class is better ending up with one 3 star and three 2 star versus your two 2 stars or your one 3 star and one 2 star.

[Billdozer]

Thanks for the feedback. It is true that a high ranking players can be a dud and sometimes a 2 or 3 star player can be an all American or a 1 star can be a scoring machine at a lower prestige school and conference. Therefore quantity is a factor. A higher ranking player is much more likely to make an impact though. One of my 3 stars is bricking shots and the other one is efficient but is not a big scorer yet.